Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-65f69f4695-22cgb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-29T03:03:11.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14 - Critical discourse analysis as methodology in Strategy as Practice research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2012

By
Eero Vaara
Edited by
Damon Golsorkhi ,
Linda Rouleau ,
David Seidl  and
Eero Vaara
Damon Golsorkhi
Affiliation:
Rouen Business School
Linda Rouleau
Affiliation:
HEC Montréal
David Seidl
Affiliation:
Universität Zürich
Eero Vaara
Affiliation:
Svenska Handelshögskolan, Helsinki
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In recent years, scholars have started to pay attention to the discursive aspects of strategizing (Knights and Morgan 1991; Hendry 2000; Samra-Fredericks 2005; Seidl 2007). These studies have highlighted the underlying assumptions of strategy as body of knowledge (Knights and Morgan 1991), the central role of narratives and other discourse forms in organizations (Barry and Elmes 1997), the importance of rhetorical skills in strategizing (Samra-Fredericks 2003, 2005) and the implications that specific conceptions of strategy have on identity and power (Mantere and Vaara 2008). This stream of research can be understood as part of the more general interest in the social and organization practices around strategy, although some scholars have argued that the Strategy as Practice movement has not been able to incorporate or develop original critical discursive perspectives on strategy (Clegg et al. 2004; Carter et al. 2008). I will in the following take a broad perspective and focus on the issue of how we can better understand the discursive aspects of strategy and strategizing from a critical angle. My intention is to try to refrain from constructing barriers between Strategy as Practice studies and critical discursive analyses, as such barriers would do a disservice both to the development of Strategy as Practice and to the promotion of critical analysis of strategy as discourse and practice.

The purpose of this chapter is to explain how critical discourse analysis (CDA) can serve to further our understanding of strategy and strategizing.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice , pp. 217 - 229
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barry, D. and Elmes, M. (1997), ‘Strategy retold: Toward a narrative view of strategic discourse’. Academy of Management Review, 22/2: 429–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, C., Clegg, S. and Kornberger, M. (2008), ‘So!apbox: Editorial essays: Strategy as practice’. Strategic Organization, 6/1: 83–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiapello, E. (2003), ‘Reconciling the two principal meanings of the notion of ideology: The example of the concept of Spirit of Capitalism’. European Journal of Social Theory, 6/2: 155–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S., Carter, C. and Kornberger, M. (2004), ‘Get up, I feel like being a strategy machine’. European Management Review, 1/1: 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, N. (1989), Language and power. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fairclough, N. (1995), Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Fairclough, N. (1997), Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fairclough, N. (2003), Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fairclough, N. (2005), ‘Discourse analysis in organization studies: The case for critical realism’. Organization Studies, 26/6: 915–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, N. and Thomas, P. (2004), ‘The discourse of globalization and the globalization of discourse’. In Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C. and Putnam, L. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational discourse. London: Sage, 379–396.Google Scholar
Fairclough, N. and Wodak, R. (1997), ‘Critical discourse analysis’. In Dijk, T. (ed.), Discourse as social interaction: 258–284. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1973), The order of things: The archaelogy of human sciences. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1980), Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977, Gordon, C. (ed.).Brighton Harvester Press.Google Scholar
Gramsci, A. (1971), Selections from the prison notebooks. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Grandy, G. and Mills, A. J. (2004), ‘Strategy as simulacra? A radical reflexive look at the discipline and practice of strategy’. Journal of Management Studies, 41/7: 1153–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardy, C., Palmer, I. and Phillips, N. (2000), ‘Discourse as a strategic resource’. Human Relations, 53: 1227–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, J. (2000), ‘Strategic decision making, discourse, and strategy as social practice’. Journal of Management Studies, 37/7: 955–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodge, B. and Coronado, G. (2006), ‘Mexico Inc.? Discourse analysis and the triumph of managerialism’. Organization, 13/4: 529–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knights, D. and Morgan, G. (1991), ‘Corporate strategy, organizations, and subjectivity: A critique’. Organisation Studies, 12/2: 251–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C. (1985), Hegemony and socialist strategy. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Laine, P.-M. and Vaara, E. (2007), ‘Struggling over subjectivity: A discursive analysis of strategic development in an engineering group’. Human Relations, 60/1: 29–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, D. L., Alvesson, M. and Willmott, H. (2003), ‘Critical approaches to strategic management’. In Alvesson, M. and Willmott, H. (eds.), Studying management critically. London: Sage, 92–109.Google Scholar
Lilley, S. (2001), ‘The language of strategy’. In Westwood, R. and Linstead, S. (eds.), The language of organization. London: Sage, 66–88.Google Scholar
Locke, K., Golden-Biddle, K. and Feldman, M. S. (2008), ‘Making doubt generative: Rethinking the role of doubt in the research process’. Organization Science, 19/6: 907–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mantere, S. and Vaara, E. (2008), ‘On the problem of participation in strategy: A critical discursive perspective’. Organization Science, 19/2: 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumby, D. (2004), ‘Discourse, power and ideology: Unpacking the critical approach’. In Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C. and Putnam, L. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational discourse. London: Sage, 237–258.Google Scholar
Phillips, N. and Hardy, C. (2002), Discourse analysis: Investigating processes of social construction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, N. and Hardy, C. (2004), ‘Discourse and power.’ In Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C. and Putnam, L. (eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational discourse. London: Sage, 299–316.Google Scholar
Phillips, N., Sewell, G. and Jaynes, S. (2008), ‘Applying critical discourse analysis in strategic management research’. Organizational Research Methods, 11/4: 770–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2003), ‘Strategizing as lived experience and strategists’ everyday efforts to shape strategic direction'. Journal of Management Studies, 40/1: 141–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2004a), ‘Understanding the production of “strategy” and “organization” through talk amongst managerial elites’. Culture and Organization, 10/2: 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2004b), ‘Managerial elites making rhetorical and linguistic “moves” for a moving (emotional) display’. Human Relations, 57/9: 1103–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samra-Fredericks, D. (2005), ‘Strategic practice, “discourse” and the everyday interactional constitution of “power effects”’. Organization, 12/6: 803–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidl, D. (2007), ‘General strategy concepts and the ecology of strategy discourses: A systemic-discursive perspective’. Organization Studies, 28/2: 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrivastava, P. (1986), ‘Is strategic management ideological?’ Journal of Management, 12/3: 363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaara, E., Kleymann, B. and Seristö, H. (2004), 'Strategies as discursive constructions: The case of airline alliances', Journal of Management Studies, 41/1: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaara, E., Sorsa, V. and Pälli, P. (forthcoming), ‘On the force potential of strategy texts: A critical discourse analysis of a strategic plan and its power effects in a city organization’, Organization.
Vaara, E. and Tienari, J. (2004), ‘Critical discourse analysis as a methodology for international business studies’. In Piekkari, R. and Welch, C. (eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business. Cheltenham: Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 342–359.Google Scholar
Vaara, E. and Tienari, J. (2008), ‘A discursive perspective on legitimation strategies in MNCs’. Academy of Management Review, 33/4: 985–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijk, T. (1990), News as discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Dijk, T. (1998), Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Leeuwen, T. and Wodak, R. (1999), ‘Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical perspective’. Discourse Studies, 1/1: 83–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, R. (2006), ‘Completing the practice turn in strategy research’. Organization Studies, 27/5: 613–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wodak, R. 2004. ‘Critical discourse analysis’. In Seale, C., Gubrium, J. F. and Silverman, D. (eds.), Qualitative research practice. London: Sage, 197–213.Google Scholar
Wodak, R., Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., and Liebhart, K. (1999), The discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (2002), Methods of critical discourse analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×